Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T04:30:09.089Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Remarks on the “Sources” of the Grotian System of International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

C.G. Roelofsen
Get access

Extract

It may not seem a very ambitious project to show which sources Grotius used in his two systematic expositions of International Law, De jure praedae and De jure belli ac pacis. One could simply refer to the indices of authors cited by Grotius in the English translations of the “Classics of International Law” series and analyse these impressive lists, looking, inter alia, for significant differences between them. However, such an approach, though no doubt useful, is only a very partial answer to the question of the “sources”, or perhaps even the “foundations”, of the Grotian system. I would suggest that it could even be seriously misleading. First of all, we have to assess Grotius' academic tools, with their mixture of references to the Scriptures, the patres ecclesiae and classical poets and philosophers in preference to sixteenth and seventeenth century authors. What is their function? As our interest is in international law, and not in philology or theology, we may well wonder how we are to deal with this mass of materials, most of which seems at first sight quite irrelevant to our subject. The abundance of wide ranging quotations in De jure belli ac pacis led Voltaire to accuse Grotius of pedantry, a charge that was also made against him as a politician and a diplomat by his contemporaries as well as by historians. If we do not consider this sufficient reason for disregarding, inter alia Plautus, Ovid, St. Ambrose and St. Augustine as “ornamental” rather than “structural” elements in the Grotian system, we may be encouraged by the example of as ardent an admirer of Grotius as Telders. His severe pruning of the overburdened text of De jure belli ac pacis was meant to reintroduce the book into general use as “the first treatise on international law ever written that aimed at completeness”.6

Type
Articles
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , May 1983 , pp. 73 - 79
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. The editions of both works used here are the well-known reproductions publistied in “The Classics of International Law”: De jure belli ac pacis (reproduction of the 1646 edition (Washington 1913)Google Scholar and De jure praedae commentarius (a reproduction of the original manuscript of 1604)(Oxford 1950)Google Scholar. There is still no modern critical edition of Grotius' works. On the various editions and English translations of De jure belli ac pacis and Mare liberum see Tuck, R., Natural rights theories, their origin and development (Cambridge 1979) p. 73 n. 31CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Feenstra, R., “Hugo de Groot's eerste beschouwingen over dominium en over de oorsprong van de private eigendom; Mare liberum en zijn bronnen” [Grotius on the origins of private property; the sources of Mare liberum], Acta juridica 1976 (Cape Town 1978) p. 269Google Scholar, at pp. 276 and 277.

2. The references are to the translations of De jure belli ac pacis by Kelsey, F.W. and of De jure praedae commentarius by Williams, G.L. and Zeydel, W.H., both republished, New York 1964Google Scholar.

3. Cf., Bos, M., “The recognized manifestations of international law”, 20 German Yearbook of International Law (1977) p. 10 at p. 15 et seqGoogle Scholar. His criticism of the term “source” of international law, though aimed at its use by students of contemporary international law also has some relevance from an historical point of view. However, in view of Grotius' own conception of “authority”, to be described below, it seems better not to abandon this term completely.

4. L'A,B,C, ou dialogues entre A,B,C (1768), premier entretien sur Hobbes, Grotius et Montesquieu. See de Michelis, F., Le origini storiche e culturali del pensiero di Ugo Grozio [On the historical and cultural sources of Grotius'; thought] (Florence 1967) p. 4 n. 2Google Scholar; cf. the opinion of D. Beaufort, O.F.M., quoted by van der Molen, G.H.J., Alberico Gentili (Leyden 1968) p. 318 n. 249Google Scholar.

5. The chief witness is Abbot, the Archbishop of Canterbury, whose adverse comment on Grotius' behaviour during his visit to England in 1613 is recounted in Knight, W.S.M., “Grotius in England”, 5 Transactions of the Grotius Society (1919Google Scholar, reprinted New York 1962) p. 1 on p. 32 et seq.:… “that the King's judgment was of him, that he was some pedant, full of words and of no great judgment.” This opinion is evidently shared by Knight himself and, more significantly, not altogether rejected by Clark, G.N., “The colonial conferences between England and the Netherlands in 1613 and 1615. Part II”, 17 Bibliotheca Visseriana (1951) p. 80Google Scholar. Cf., Fruin, R., “Hugo de Groot en Maria van Reigersbergh”, in Verspreide geschriften [Collected Works] (The Hague 1901) IV, p. 82 and passimGoogle Scholar; also Molhuysen, P.C., Briefwisseling van Hugo Grotius [Letters from and to Grotius] I (The Hague 1929) p. xxiv et seqGoogle Scholar. and Poelhekke, J.J., Hendrik, Frederik [Biography of stadholder Frederick Henry] (Zutphen 1978) p. 368Google Scholar.

6. Barents, J. and Douma, A.J.S., eds., Hugonis Grotii De jure belli ac pacis. An extract by B.M. Telders (The Hague 1948), p. xvGoogle Scholar.

7. Telders, B.M., “Pour qu'on lise Grotius”, in Verspreide geschriften [Collected Works] II (The Hague 1948) p. 8Google Scholar.

8. Cf., Hazard, P., La crise de la conscience europeenne (1680–1715) I (Paris 1935), p. 38 et seq.Google Scholar; also Mattingly, G., Renaissance diplomacy (London 1965) p. 273 et seqGoogle Scholar.

9. Mare liberum, chapter V; Scott, J.B., ed., The freedom of the seas (translated by Magoffin, R. Van Deman) (New York 1916) p. 28Google Scholar.

10. Whitman, N.T., “Myth and politics: Versailles and the fountain of Latona”, in Rule, J.C., ed., Louis XIV and the craft of kingship (Ohio 1969) p. 286 at p. 291 et seqGoogle Scholar.

11. A striking example is given by Vitoria's argument in proof of the freedom of intercourse between nations, the mainstay of his proposition. See Nys, E., ed., De Indis et de jure belli relectiones (Washington 1917) pp. 258 (quotation from Virgil) and 259 (quotation from Ovid)Google Scholar.

12. See De jure belli (translated by Rolfe, J.C.) (republished New York 1964), index of authors citedGoogle Scholar.

13. For example, De jure belli ac pads. III. X. I and II.

14. See De jure belli (reproduction of the text of 1612) (Oxford 1933) II, pp. 342, 343Google Scholar; op.cit., supra n. 12, p. 210 et seq. Here Gentili is dealing with the treatment of captives. Grotius' treatment of this question (De jure belli ac pacis III, XI, XIII) closely follows Gentili's and he quotes the same passage from Seneca. Both authors follow a traditional line of argument, which can also be found, for example, in the works of the Spanish sixteenth century humanist Gines de Sepulveda. See Fernández-Santamaria, J.A., The state, war and peace. Spanish political thought in the renaissance 1516–1559 (Cambridge 1977) p. 219CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15. Already commented upon by Fruin. See Fruin, R., op. cit. supra n. 5, III, p. 431Google Scholar; an English translation of Fruin's article, “An unpublished work of Hugo Grotius”, 5 Bibliotheca Visseriana (1925) p. 3. Cf.Google Scholar, van der Molen, G.H.J., Alberico Gentili and the development of international law (Leyden 1968) p. 243 et seqGoogle Scholar.

16. Nussbaum, A., A concise history of international law (New York 1953) pp. 97, 164Google Scholar. Mattingly, loc. cit., supra n. 8.

17. E.g., op. cit., supra n. 14, p. 211.

18. Obviously the same applies to De jure praedae. See Prolegomena, Laws I and II. There are, however, very significant differences. Cf., St. Leger, J., The “etiasi daremus” of Hugo Grotius. A study in the origins of international law (Rome 1962) p. 137 et seqGoogle Scholar.

19. De jure belli ac pacis, Prolegomena 8, 11 on the “natural” origins of the law of nature; Prolegomena 48 et seq. on the value of the Old Testament and New Testament as sources. It should be remarked that the famous “etiamsi daremus” (Prolegomena 11) was expressed in the first edition of De jure belli ac pacis in an absolute form (“locum haberent”) and was later mitigated. Molhuysen, P.C., “The first edition of Grotius's De jure belli ac pads”, 5 Bibliotheca Visseriana (1925) p. 101 at p. 106Google Scholar.

20. Haggenmacher, P., “Genese et signification du concept de “jus gentium” chez Grotius”, in 2 Grotiana (1981) p. 44 at p. 90 and passimCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21. Pufendorf is the best known protagonist of this thesis. Cf., Nussbaum, , op.cit., supra n. 16, p. 148 et seqGoogle Scholar.

22. Truyol, A., Doctrines contemporaines du droit des gens (Paris 1951) p. 229 n. 40Google Scholar.

23. Cf. Nussbaum, , op. cit., supra n. 16, p. 296 et seqGoogle Scholar.

24. Ambrosetti, G., I presupposti teologici e speculativi delle concezioni giuridiche di Grozio [The theological and philosophical basis of Grotius'juridical thought], (Bologna 1955) pp. 117 and 118 and passimGoogle Scholar. Cf. St. Leger, , op.cit., supra n. 18, p. 122 et seqGoogle Scholar. However, see contra, Haggenmacher, , loc.cit., supra n. 20, at p. 91Google Scholar, who suggests that Grotius arrived at his construction of the “jus gentium” independently from Suarez. Haggenmacher certainly argues the case for Grotius' originality with great acumen. However, his conclusions, as he himself points out are “au mieux probable”.

25. Cf. Hazard, , op. cit., supra n. 8, p. 39Google Scholar.

26. De jure belli ac pacis, Prolegomena 30.

27. Cf., von Kaltenborn, C., Die Vorlaüfer des Hugo Grotius auf dent Gebiete des jus naturae etgentium (Leipzig 1847)Google Scholar.

28. On the famous question of Grotius' use of numerous quotations from Gentili, see Van der Molen, , op.cit., supra n. 15, pp. 318, 319, notes 241–243Google Scholar; also Feenstra, , loc.cit., supra n. 1 at p. 277 n. 11Google Scholar. The relation between Grotius and Suarez (and the neo-scholastics in general, the Jesuit professor at Louvain, Lessius, among them) is far more complex. Cf., Ambrosetti, , op.cit., supra n. 24, pp. 110, 111 and StGoogle Scholar. Leger, , op.cit., supra n. 18, p. 105 et seqGoogle Scholar.

29. Tuck, , op.cit., supra n. 1, p. 75Google Scholar, notes the immediate criticisms of Grotius for “imitating” the scholastics.

30. E.g., in the treatment of intervention on behalf of subjects waging war against their ruler (De jure belli ac pacis, II, XXV, VIII), where Grotius' quotation from Thucydides is identical to Gentili's, (op.cit., supran. 14., p. 119)Google Scholar.

31. The most readily accessible is the edition by Scott, J.B., Selections from three works of Francisco Suarez, S.J. (Oxford 1944)Google Scholar; the translation is by G.L. Williams, A. Brown and J. Waldron, republished New York 1964.

32. Mare liberum, chapters I and VIII; Scott, J.B., op.cit., supra n. 9, p. 7 et seq., p. 61 et seqGoogle Scholar. Cf., Oudendijk, J.K., Status and extent of adjacent waters (Leyden 1970) p. 20Google Scholar; also reproduced in Holk, L.E. van and Roelofsen, C.G., eds., Grotius reader, a reader for students of international law and legal history (The Hague 1983)Google Scholar.

33. Oudendijk, , op. cit., supra n. 32, p. 47Google Scholar; De jure belli ac pacis, II, II, XXIV.

34. Booty taken in an unjust war is a fair prize, as is that taken in a bellum justum, Dejure belli ac pacis, III, VI, II. Cf., Schmitt, C., Der Nomos der Erde (Cologne 1950) p. 134 nGoogle Scholar.

35. Cf., Oudendijk, J.K., “Van Vollenhoven's ‘The three stages in the evolution of the law of nations’, A case of wishful thinking”, 48 The legal history review (1980) p. 10CrossRefGoogle Scholar. As Tuck, (op.cit., supra n. 1, p. 79)Google Scholar states, in another context: “The book (i.e., De jure belli ac pacts) is Janus-faced…“

36. De jure belli ac pacis, Prolegomena 18–27.

37. As in the discussion of the rules of warfare, where he seems to allow a great deal at first sight, only to withdraw his approval in “temperamenta”. In my opinion, Roberts, M., “The military revolution, 1560–1660”, in idem, Essays in Swedish history (London 1967) p. 195 at p. 217Google Scholar, takes Grotius' concessions to “the absolute, feral warfare of the epoch” too much at face value.

38. Tex, J. den, Oldenbarnevelt [A biography of Oldenbarnevelt] II (Haarlem 1962), p. 288 and passimGoogle Scholar. A good example of Grotius' intimate relationship with Oldenbarnevelt is given by W.J.M. van Eysinga, “Eene onuitgegeven nota van De Groot”, in idem, Sparsa collecta (Leyden 1958) p. 488 at p. 495.

39. Supra, n. 33; also the passages granting belligerents the right of transit through neutral territory and even the right to occupy fortresses there, (De jure belli ac pads, II, II, X), which clearly reflect Dutch activity in the German Rhineland.

40. Dumbauld, E., The life and legal writings of Hugo Grotius (Norman 1969) p. 65 and n. 50Google Scholar; cf., Kossmann, E.H., Politieke theorie in het zeventiende-eeuwse Nederland [Dutch 17th century political theory] (Amsterdam 1960) p. 78Google Scholar.

41. De jure belli ac pacis, II, XV, VIII; Eysinga, Van, “The colonal conferences between England and the Netherlands in 1613 and 1615. Part I”, 15 Bibliotheca Visseriana (1940) at p. 253 et seqGoogle Scholar.

42. De jure belli ac pacis, II, XV, XII. See also Grotius' well-known oecumenical views which were the main inspiration for his numerous theological works. See Haentjens, A.H., Hugo de Groot als godsdienstig denker [Grotius as theologian] (Amsterdam 1946)Google Scholar.

43. It should be remarked that during Grotius' lifetime France enjoyed the unique distinction of officially tolerating both Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. On Grotius' attitude towards the Huguenots and its alleged influence on Richelieu's policy, see Orcibal, J.C., “Louis XIV and the edict of Nantes”, in Hatton, R.. ed., Louis XIV and absolutism (London 1976), p. 155Google Scholar. Tex, Den, op.cit., supra n. 38, p. 349 et seq.Google Scholar; cf. Boogman, J.C., Van spel en spelers [Collected essays] (The Hague 1982) p. 38Google Scholar.

44. Vide supra n. 35 on the non-obligatory character of the bellum justum.

45. Dejure belli ac pacis, II, IV and II, XXIII, XI.

46. Boogman, , op. cit., supra n. 43, p. 31 quotes Grotius as a representative of “status quo conservatism”Google Scholar.

47. In addition to his own diplomatic and political activities, Grotius' official position as state historiographer should be mentioned.

48. See, e.g., Lessius, L., De justitia et jure (Antwerp 1632; first edition 1605) p. 42Google Scholar, on the origins of property: “Itaque hoc jus gentium nihil est aliud quam commune hominum judicium et gentium consensus”. Lessius is much more frequently quoted in De jure belli ac pads than Suarez. See the index to Kelsey's translation (supra n. 2), Vide supra, n. 24.